Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What comes after open source

words.steveklabnik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 133 posts

Re: What comes after open source

#111

Post by steveklabnik »

heathjohns wrote: post #102
steveklabnik wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that, to really think about this problem, you need to keep zooming out. But I also know that programmers tend to reach for abstractions quite often, and you can go up and up and up that chain. I was trying to stay at this one specific level, and not zoom out too far :) Thanks for a great comment.

Good point - sorry if my comment was a derail!

Not at all! That’s why these kinds of spaces to exist, to expand on the ideas presented in the link. And my goal here is to facilitate more conversion, so this is exactly what I wanted :)

Re: What comes after open source

#112

Post by readingnews »

I take minor aim a this part:

"but what people care about most today is about the production of software. Software licences regulate distribution, but cannot regulate production. (technically they can, but practically, they can’t. I get into this below.)"

Interestingly, I did not see the part where he really gets into this. Speaking of history, I think one thing is forgotten here: before open source, how did you produce software?? By buying closed source software, of course! So, this is the catch-22. You claim they care about the production of software, but without open source tools, you would then be at the mercy of closed source systems in order to build your software. I am not saying it is bad, but I would have never really gotten into software without GNU... Turbo-C from Mix software was cheap, but the others were too far out of reach. One day I woke up and the tools were too expensive. I don't think we want to go back there... to the same place our phones are in now.

Re: What comes after open source

#113

Post by thebaer »

phkahler wrote: post #90
heathjohns wrote: post #53

I think we need to zoom out more, even. The focus on freedom is too narrow - freedom at the cost of becoming disconnected is a raw deal. What we want is power. In the desktop era, having source code gave us power, so we associated the two and demanded the former - but this obviously hasn't translated to the cloud. You can't download a Facebook profile and then re-upload it somewhere else and still be connected to all…

>> When I want to stop using something, but I can't, that's power someone holds over me. To take that power back means you have to do things yourself, and that means manage your own data. Unfortunately that is too much to ask of the general public, at least with the free tools available today. People are trading power for convenience, in part because most people don't have the power (know-how and/or time) in the firs…

I don't think it's too much to ask of the general public.

Think of WordPress -- free software you can either run yourself or pay a company to run for you. If you don't like a particular hosting company, you can click a button to export your data, and upload it with a new host -- or with other software that understands the WordPress export format. All of this data handling is manageable by most non-technical people. The process is hardly any different than downloading an email attachment and sending it to someone else, or uploading it somewhere.

It seems to me the biggest problem is either data not being exportable from these services, or the exported data not being machine-readable. If the format is machine-readable, developers can create alternative software that works with it; managed services can then develop around that software; everyday consumers can eventually end up with more choice, freedom, and power.

Re: What comes after open source

#114

Post by rkido »

"Open process" might be a good term for everything else that goes into producing open-source software.

Free software is not about licenses; they're a very limited means to an end. If we didn't have copyright, some other means would be needed.

For freedom to spread, free software has to become faster, prettier, more convenient, and more intuitive than proprietary software. I would go further than this and say that the distinction between developers and users has to become fuzzier, so that anyone can edit software without needing to be a "developer".

Sadly, developers love their arcane tools because it makes them feel elite. And the FSF / GNU project participates in this elitism by continuing to promote such arcane tools. Software like GNU Emacs only meets the absolute bare minimum of "free software"; it empowers hackers but it doesn't empower the general public.

The next movement, whatever it will be called, needs to embrace open source licensing, and open process, and end user empowerment.

Re: What comes after open source

#115

Post by morenoh149 »

cr0sh wrote: post #104
morenoh149 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I'd like a software union. Especially for fields like medical devices and those new autonomous cars. What are some of the anti-software-union arguments?

> What are some of the anti-software-union arguments? Part of it, I believe, revolves around salary/pay levels - there is a very large gap between the lowest and highest; this isn't completely based on geographical location, though the higher pay does skew toward SV of course. Most developers, though, are fine with this disparity - that might be a "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" problem, but for those willing t…

I think it makes sense to start small. Engineers opt into such an org. Pay dues. A pension is setup. Some leadership is voted in to run the org based on interest and bandwidth.

The union shines when it can do collective bargaining and ensure minimum salary benefits for certain roles. Certification could be offered for very specialized roles as subject matter experts join and build a curriculum.

Re: What comes after open source

#116

Post by morenoh149 »

morenoh149 wrote: post #96
intelliderp wrote: post #15

Open source was such a powerful movement. In 2011, I was making six figures in a major city for a huge company. Then, I got laid off and couldn't afford rent anymore, so I had to move back to my hometown in another state that same month. I had barely any savings at all due to the relocation costs I just paid to move to said city. I pulled a 5-year-old desktop computer out of storage, bought a new $50 hard drive for i…

Where is the idea that software engineers are anti-union coming from? I'd like to know. I like the idea of a software union and would love to flesh that out. Its been well documented that the FANNG corps have been suppressing wages for several years. Software is eating the world and if we have a role in that creation we should have a larger portion of the benefits.

@intelliderp you got buried. I'd love to see links to such anti-union hn discussions. I kinda get that HN is very capitalistic and unions check reckless capitalism. But at the same time HN is very dev focused and unions promise larger benefits/money to devs.

I'll go on the record saying I'm pro dev union. Even if its just a glorified professional organization. I'd love to hear the holes in the argument.

The corporations are financially motivated to prevent unionization. If you want a piece of the future you have to be just as savvy.

One tricky bit is if unionizing just causes a massive exodus of development to offshore. Thoughts on that?

Re: What comes after open source

#117

Post by steveklabnik »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #80
steveklabnik wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (I also think he conveniently avoided one of the reasons we're seeing license/open source splintering -- because of attempts to find ways to _make a profit_ off open source. See the Amazon/ElasticSearch dispute. This is a real thing going on in the landscape he's talking about, with maybe more impact than the ideological concerns he talks about, but is inconvenient for what he wants to talk about. I still have no s…

Right on. I think it's probably as much of what's going on with open source as ideology (including beliefs about 'fairness') though. (Or maybe I'm just a Marxist who thinks material conditions usually are primary to ideology :) ). There were ways people made a living while producing libre/open source for the last 30ish years, that also produced quality, useful, sustainable software. I think those ways have broken dow…

I can get into some base/superstructure, for sure :)

Re: What comes after open source

#118

Post by steveklabnik »

morenoh149 wrote: post #116
morenoh149 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the idea that software engineers are anti-union coming from? I'd like to know. I like the idea of a software union and would love to flesh that out. Its been well documented that the FANNG corps have been suppressing wages for several years. Software is eating the world and if we have a role in that creation we should have a larger portion of the benefits.

@intelliderp you got buried. I'd love to see links to such anti-union hn discussions. I kinda get that HN is very capitalistic and unions check reckless capitalism. But at the same time HN is very dev focused and unions promise larger benefits/money to devs. I'll go on the record saying I'm pro dev union. Even if its just a glorified professional organization. I'd love to hear the holes in the argument. The corporati…

Here's a recent HN discussion about unions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19433610

You can read the thread and draw your own conclusions. My impression is taken from reading a number of these threads over years; I could be wrong!

Re: What comes after open source

#119

Post by intelliderp »

morenoh149 wrote: post #116
morenoh149 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where is the idea that software engineers are anti-union coming from? I'd like to know. I like the idea of a software union and would love to flesh that out. Its been well documented that the FANNG corps have been suppressing wages for several years. Software is eating the world and if we have a role in that creation we should have a larger portion of the benefits.

@intelliderp you got buried. I'd love to see links to such anti-union hn discussions. I kinda get that HN is very capitalistic and unions check reckless capitalism. But at the same time HN is very dev focused and unions promise larger benefits/money to devs. I'll go on the record saying I'm pro dev union. Even if its just a glorified professional organization. I'd love to hear the holes in the argument. The corporati…

Yeah, I'm apparently shadow-banned on HN for some users.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13564440

Arguments often encountered:

* Compensation/mobility is good enough not to need unions. * Workers don't have enough leverage to do anything anyway. * Unions restrict you in undesirable ways. * Unions are shady and corrupt.

Re: What comes after open source

#120

Post by dwaltrip »

phkahler wrote: post #90
heathjohns wrote: post #53

I think we need to zoom out more, even. The focus on freedom is too narrow - freedom at the cost of becoming disconnected is a raw deal. What we want is power. In the desktop era, having source code gave us power, so we associated the two and demanded the former - but this obviously hasn't translated to the cloud. You can't download a Facebook profile and then re-upload it somewhere else and still be connected to all…

>> When I want to stop using something, but I can't, that's power someone holds over me. To take that power back means you have to do things yourself, and that means manage your own data. Unfortunately that is too much to ask of the general public, at least with the free tools available today. People are trading power for convenience, in part because most people don't have the power (know-how and/or time) in the firs…

> at least with the free tools available today.

This problem is potentially solvable by creating better tools that allow people to have control over their data and still gain the benefits and convenience of the closed functionality on offer today.

Or perhaps the solution, at least in some cases, is at the protocol / standards level -- email is my favorite example of this.

The question is, in the general case, whether development of the tools that are designed to give users all of the power can keep up with that of closed tools managed by for-profit companies? It seems difficult to compete with products that are produced by the likes of FAANG.

Important clarification: this is not about profit vs not-for-profit. It's about control, flexibility, and lock-in.

Post reply on HN